A further case with a small supernumerary marker chromosome (sSMC) derived from chromosome 1—evidence for high variability in mosaicism in different tissues of sSMC carriers

A prenatally ascertained case with a de novo small supernumerary marker chromosome (sSMC) derived from chromosome 1 is reported. Due to a fetal heart defect the parents decided in favour of an induced abortion. Postmortem, a molecular cytogenetic study on eleven formalin fixed, paraffin-embedded tissues of the fetus was performed, to further characterize the levels of mosaicism of the sSMC(1). sSMC presence varied between 13 and 62% within different tissues of sSMC carriers. This finding is something common in sSMC carriers and could explain why up to the present no clinical correlations for sSMC mosaicism and clinical outcome in the corresponding carriers could be established. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Prenatal diagnosis of a de novo supernumerary marker derived from chromosome 16

Marker chromosomes are supernumerary chromosomes of unknown origin and are seldom found in prenatal diagnosis. Application of fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) allows the identification of the chromosomal origin of markers. Estimation of the risk of an abnormal phenotype outcome can be enabled by collecting data on phenotypes associated with markers of the same chromosomal origin. So far only very few cases of prenatal diagnosis of de novo supernumerary markers derived from chromosome 16 have been reported. Here the prenatal diagnosis of a de novo supernumerary marker chromosome 16 is described and the relevant literature discussed. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A 10-year survey, 1980–1990, of prenatally diagnosed small supernumerary marker chromosomes,identified by fish analysis. Outcome and follow-up of 14 cases diagnosed in a series of 12 699 prenatal samples

A cytogenetic survey and follow-up studies were made of 14 cases with supernumerary marker chromosomes, identified among 12 699 prenatal samples, investigated at our institution over a 10-year period from 1980 to 1990. FISH (fluorescence in situ hybridization) techniques were employed to identify the chromosomal origin of the marker chromosomes. Five cases were familial, all derived from acrocentric chromosomes, and all without apparent phenotypic effects in the children. Nine cases represented de novo aberrations. In two cases (one with a marker from chromosome 14 or 22, the other with a ring-like marker derived from chromosome 17), the pregnancies continued and apparently normal babies were delivered at term, but the child with a marker derived from chromosome 17 showed slight psychomotor retardation at 2 years of age. All other pregnancies with de novo markers were terminated. In three cases, significant abnormalities were found at autopsy. One of these had an isochromosome 12p and the phenotype was consistent with Pallister-Killian syndrome. In conclusion, marker chromosome identification, as well as clinical follow-up, is essential for the purpose of improving genetic counselling.